Posted on 11/24/2012 6:27:53 PM PST by truthfinder9
Yes, I am generally familiar with the theory, and it appears to have some merit. Thanks for the link. It’s been a while since I read anything on it.
There were not atheists at that time, but that did not prevent them from practically acting as such, while the hardness of heart shown in rejecting Moses would latter be seen in rejecting the Messiah. Acts 7
The Jews (I’m not addressing the “mixed multitudes” of the times) did not reject Moses, he was their rebbe and leader. They feared leaving the relative spirituality of living in the desert, surrounded by miraculous godly clouds, fed from manna from heaven, and involving themselves with nothing but studying G-d’s Torah in all its depth. Not a bad life. Then....they were told to go be farmers... big challenges ensued (not to mention that Moses would not enter the Holy Land with them...)
So that’s the Jewish perspective. They (and we) certainly don’t reject the Messiah ;-) But you know what I mean.
To my original comment, science cannot “prove” the age of the earth. We Jews know that Torah is objective and true, and hence know the age of the world. Interestingly, no scientist can prove that Torah at Sinai did not happen (G-d forbid) because one cannot prove something from a negative inference.
No progress whatsoever has ever come from ascribing supernatural means to explain physical phenomena.
Science is in the business of using physical means to describe physical phenomena; and that is why it is useful - while creationism is useless.
Liberal think. Just because the YOUNG EARTH creationists are wrong about time, and all God's children coming into this flesh age from the Adam and Eve alone, does not give the fairy tale/tail of TOE any credibility.
The admission that flesh man cannot test the unseen supernatural world does not mean that world does not exist. This flesh age is almost ripe and ready to be tossed into the dust bin of history. Nobody in the return of a non-flesh age body is going to give a hoot or holler about this particular 'age'.
Walt has been providing his book for free at his online website which is [last I checked anyways] in its 8th edition since first being published in 1980. I bought hard copies of both the 7th and 8th editions. He added over 100 page between these two alone!
The only scientific argument I’ve encountered over the years had to do with the fracture of the hydroplate heating the oceans to a boiling cauldron. However the skeptical ‘scientific’ argument failed to regard the effect of ripping a seam in the earth’s atmosphere that would circumnavigate the globe and mitigate the heat gain with a heat loss and an instance ice age encircling the poles primarily.
You two would also probably enjoy my other creation science links on my FR account links page. Lastly, Walt too was somewhat of a former atheist/agnostic even though he was raised as a Methodist. Another excellent source for defending the faith is Lee Strobel. Have you heard or better yet listened to his books on disc:
The Case for Christ
The Case for Faith
The Case for Creation
Many think they have conclusively and scientifically proven the ages of the Earth and Universe. If they ever truly could they’ll have to find at least two clocks in a very close precise accurate estimate for starters. Even then how will they explain all of the very short ticking clocks/facts? Occam’s Razor is probably best suited reference frame for this task imho. Of course not also forgetting Einstein’s time references and uncertainties as well.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Which Bible verse states that Adam's age was calculated from the time he was cast out of Eden?
It is mainly useful for the learned man to see just how much complexity yet organization God has inter-woven throughout all of His Creation - therefore enticing the greatness of the need to worship, praise, glorify and humble oneself before Our Great and Blessed Benefactor rather than to build up pride in one’s own sight as he daily realigns his puny learning and understanding within a vast and awesomely complex yet symbiotic Earth and Universe!
Who has authority to speak without question on the age(s)? The Bible for some is the standard that speaks the instruction from the Heavenly Father, the Creator. I think it was no coincidence or accident that our founding 'flesh' fathers in their acknowledgment that certain unalienable rights come only from the Creator.
So what did the Creator have His elect pen regarding the ages? Well, Peter, that one that some claim they inherited a key manufacturing plant, to reshape Peter's keys, wrote there are three different heaven/earth ages. (IIPeter 3 whole chapter) The translators used the word 'world' but a little looking into the meaning of the word 'world' Peter used, will demonstrate the meaning is 'age'.
That heaven/earth age that WAS was destroyed by a flood among other natural phenomenon, like super volcanoes, earthquakes and space junk hitting this earth. There was a natural mix of 'disasters', controlled by the Creator that removed the first rebel from his perch over the mercy seat. None of the casting down - overthrow had a flesh body of humans any where near it.
The whole purpose of this age, is for each and every soul/spirit ever created to decide if they will get placed into the womb at conception. (This would of course exclude those first flesh beings created as fully grown adults.) To be born of woman (or take this flesh journey) is the first require to 'see the kingdom of God'. We are told in Ecclesiastes 1:11 there is no remembrance of former things ....., now how is it even conceivable to consider not remembering something if it never happened. And some of the sons of God refused to take this flesh journey. The Bible says the soul/spirit returns to the Maker that sent it and the flesh return to the dust from whence it came.
There is none and neither is there a verse to the contrary.
The point made is that those that attack ‘Young Earthers’ are engaging in nonsense just as Young Earthers are. The Bible says nothing about a 6000 year old Earth or provides clear reference that establishes a 6000 year old Earth. The Bible is still consistent.
That said, there are references in the Bible that scholars propound from saying that Adam lived ‘physically’ for 900+ years after expulsion from the Garden.
There are clear references that Adam was formed in ‘spirit’ before the creation of the Garden of Eden. In other words Adam came into existence before the Garden existed.
So there are ‘gaps’ that leave mysteries that cannot be solved. In my view any person or organization that endeavors to prove the Earth is young or prove the Bible is false in revealing the Earth is young (the Bible does not reveal this), that these endeavors are an exercise in futility.
My view is that those engaged in proving the Earth is young are misguided and those that attempt to prove the Bible is false are opportunists who seek to distort facts or refer to facts which are not actual facts.
You are being charitable, but Scripture testifies that, like us, they were overall rebellious and drew back in faith in the tests they faced, which i have shown i can do as well.
Thus the testimony of Moses was, “Ye have been rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you. “ (Deuteronomy 9:24) See also Ps. 78, 106.
And the overall rejection of the Messiah was that of Jesus Christ.
I believe I said that the explanation I was giving (that of the Jews desiring a leader like the image (of an ox) that they saw on G-d’s chariot) was part of the depth of Torah. Yes, as you indicate, the simple reading of the verse indicates that they were rebellious.
However, as you quoted, they rebelled against G-d. (not Moses.)
Answer for me please (for all Christians—don’t worry, they won’t mind,) do Christians reject all Jewish scholarship on the Torah? (the works I referenced in one of my first or second post...another link: http://www.myjewishlearning.com/texts/Rabbinics/Midrash/Midrash_Halakhah/Sifra-Sifre.shtml) I would assume yes, they do, because it detracts from your last point, about “...the overall rejection of Messiah...”
I have a point, other than stating definitively that Jews don’t believe JC was supernatural.... we can calmly debate that elsewhere, or not...
BUT our depth of Torah goes beyond the literal, poorly translated verse you are relying on. In the beginning G-d created..... ...and the world was chaos and void... etc... Jews know that there were spiritual (dimensions, if you please) before our physical world’s creation. We know that Adam’s long life began at year one, on the first Rosh Hashana of the planet. We know that there aren’t “gaps” as others have explained. We know that, although not mentioned once in Genesis, Avram (later Avraham) at the age of 3 conceived that there must be one G-d who created everything and began a life-long search for Him. Our sages told us! They had divine inspiration. Our ancestors received the Torah and it’s 613 commandments, practical, defined, objective for Jews, and 7 for non-Jews (www.noahide.org.)
And anyone can read my first post on the thread to understand that science cannot “prove” how old the earth is. That’s the bottom line for Bible believers on this thread.
No, they do not reject all Jewish scholarship on the Torah any more than that of others, but examine it in the light of the Scriptures.
Classic commentator John Gill (http://www.studylight.org/com/geb) often includes Jewish understadning.
But you are presenting Jewish scholarship on the Torah as uniform, while i think it is not.
It is indeed uniform....to Jews. The way we explain that Rabbi A says “yes” and Rabbi B says “no!” is with the understanding that, “...These and These are words of the living G-d.” )an example: http://www.torah.org/learning/parsha-insights/5761/shemini.html)
So if you are referring to the (seemingly frustrating) way that rabbis say different things and that Jews seem to disagree on what to eat/dress/pray....this is how we adapt and overcome while fulfilling the mission of bringing Moshiach—making the world a dwelling place for G-d.
Another reason for the seeming disagreement of rabbis on the same issue, is that they are explaining a different level of the Torah (as I said, there are many, even infinite levels to G-dly knowledge.) Ask your local orthodox rabbi.
That's obvious. Why in Sam Hill would a person even expect a *supernatural* event to shed any light on natural phenomena? It can't by definition.
No progress whatsoever has ever come from ascribing supernatural means to explain physical phenomena
No *technological* progress. But there's more to life than technology, isn't there? Who teaches us more about love...the poet or the endocrinologist?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.